Parenthood, Like Homosexuality, Is Not A Choice
Or so sayeth a wanker in Poor Skills, anyway, LJ's dominant source for incredibly tedious whiny advice posts, stupid food spoilage questions, and the occasional, very rare speck of useful information.

This is not one of these.

It starts when someone posts the following, which has since been deleted:

Poor Skills & Children
Let me preface this post by saying that it will probably offend someone. However, it's really not my intention to offend anyone, I'd just like some honest answers/opinions.

Okay, so we talk about poor skills in this community, ways to cook cheaply, rent cheaply, repair credit and old cars, etc. However, never in this community have I seen much reference to the one poor skill that can save you more money than any other, which is choosing to not have children or at least to not have them until you're financially stable enough to do so (kids are REALLY expensive). I've seen online articles saying that children cost roughly $100,000 (not sure if that figure is accurate) to raise. That's PER child. So why, if you can't even support yourself financially are you bringing a child into this world? I understand that s*** happens and so do accidents, but with modern birth control, there is absolutely no reason for accidents to happen (unless of course you're part of the 0.03% that had The Pill fail). Answers/opinions? Again, I'm not a troll, nor am I looking to start a huge debate.

(Taken from the mouse on Wank Report)

Then, tonight, Danaseilhan makes this statement: No poor-bashing! And btw, if you guys don't cut it out, I'm making my own comm where I can BAN j00. Also, hear my tragic tale.

To which I thought, meh, because I sort of have a midterm to write here, but then I noticed the ~250 comments and decided to investigate.

OMG SO OFFENDED bitching spawned from bad wording and some people quick to up-hackle? You don't say.

Random flaming disguised as civil discourse? You bet.

My fav, though? Apparently, parenthood, like homosexuality, is not a choice omg.

That's as far as I got before realising I reeeeally needed to back away and go do my homework. However, I do encourage you all to enjoy.

(And yes, the childfree are mightily in abundance, as are their many detractors. There's no sense to link because, really. Just click randomly and you'll get a face full of their spooge. Salty.)

ETA: Danaseilhan has gone and made her comm.

ETA2: Noooo! Bahleeted! Original mouse saved the text of the comm advert post, but does anyone have stuff from the main spooge post?

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	scarah2 2006-10-19 05:45 pm UTC (link)
	I am fortunate to live in the reality that has Planned Parenthood in it. Everyone does have the means. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	oar 2006-10-19 06:02 pm UTC (link)
	That's assuming that there's a Planned Parenthood within a reasonable distance and that one has some means of getting to it. Not always the case, unfortunately. And in some cases, the problem isn't so much lack of access as lack of education. Which is a whole different can of worms. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	scarah2 2006-10-19 06:07 pm UTC (link)
	Well, where I live it's in bus distance of everyone, and the ads for free birth control are on the bus. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	mindset 2006-10-19 06:16 pm UTC (link)
	So, it's not reality, but merely your neighborhood of reality? ;) (Reply to this)(Parent)

	antigone 2006-10-19 06:16 pm UTC (link)
	Okay.... so what if poor people WANT a child? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	scarah2 2006-10-19 06:18 pm UTC (link)
	What if they want a boat, or a Rolex? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	antigone 2006-10-19 06:59 pm UTC (link)
	Because that's the same. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	scarah2 2006-10-19 07:01 pm UTC (link)
	They are all expensive liabilities that can be enhancing to the lives of people who want them. I do not see the difference. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

altoidsaddict
2006-10-19 07:40 pm UTC (link)

Someone's Rolex won't grow up someday to become a police officer, a nurse, or a junkie depending on how badly the schools are funded. We don't have communal funding to pay for the maintenance of a boat. We don't have government agencies who determine if a Rolex is not cared for properly.

If you can't tell the difference between a human being and an object, I think that's pretty darn frightening.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	eviemouse 2006-10-19 07:43 pm UTC (link)
	Thank you - I was trying for a reply, but couldn't come up with one nearly as calm or as concise. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

altoidsaddict
2006-10-19 07:48 pm UTC (link)

Yeah, I had a couple of frothing drafts myself. I grew up poor, but the mere fact of being poor did not screw me up, nor did it make my mother a bad parent. The mere fact of being rich does not make someone a better parent, either.

I'm childfree, I don't like kids, and even when I was one I avoided them where I could; but my shrivelled, useless uterus does not preclude my ability to recognize the many ways our society overwhelmingly regards children as a communal good.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	chrome327 2006-10-21 09:36 pm UTC (link)
	Day late, but I just wanted to say - I <3 this, my poor ass family <3's this, and my ghetto baseball team about to play in the World Series <3's you. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	scarah2 2006-10-19 07:49 pm UTC (link)
	Wow. No, a human being is not an object. Would you be cooler with the analogy of those unable to pay vet bills adopting Pomeranians? You are correct, I do pay for people to maintain children that they don't afford. So perhaps that is the most convenient of desires beyond means. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

altoidsaddict
2006-10-19 07:53 pm UTC (link)

A Pomeranian is also not a communal good. Dogs are still recognized as property - while I may not agree with that because they are living beings, societies do not center themselves around dog ownership. I don't care how many doggie daycares open, they're not the same thing.

There are few societal absolutes - the obligation of a society to recognize the need to reproduce and balance the rights of parents with the needs of future generations comes closest to an absolute. Simply because you believe the poor should be stripped of their children and right to reproduce does not make it a societal value. And thank God.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	scarah2 2006-10-19 08:02 pm UTC (link)
	Hi, words in my mouth. I said the poor have options (not everywhere, but in many communities) and I think that those with less resources (dude, I'm poor) are people with thought processes and responsibilities and choices, not idiots to be handled with kid gloves. Did I recommend poisoning the water anywhere here? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	altoidsaddict 2006-10-19 08:58 pm UTC (link)
	You said the poor should go to Planned Parenthood for birth control, and that they had no more right to children than they do to a Rolex or a boat. "Options" seem to be pretty limited here. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	scarah2 2006-10-19 09:11 pm UTC (link)
	You said the poor should go to Planned Parenthood for birth control, and that they had no more right to children than they do to a Rolex or a boat "Should?" "Right?" I don't think I ever said these words. I think I said that PP is available in many places and that a child is an expensive liability. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	antigone 2006-10-19 08:43 pm UTC (link)
	Then I have nothing more to say. (Reply to this)(Parent)

lizzypaul
2006-10-19 08:04 pm UTC (link)

Oh. How nice for you. When I was in high school, our PP was two hours away, with no bus service. Also, no ads, and no sex-ed, so we pretty much had to learn from the internets where to go if we wanted BC. And that's in fucking California. I don't know what the poor folks in South Dakota do (where there is one PP for the entire state).

Your reality is not my reality, kthnxbi.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	scarah2 2006-10-19 08:10 pm UTC (link)
	Admittedly that is less than ideal, and I was speaking only for my own community. I keep sending money to PP and voting, so I'm doing what I can. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	altoidsaddict 2006-10-19 08:56 pm UTC (link)
	You were, in fact, speaking for "everyone." "I am fortunate to live in the reality that has Planned Parenthood in it. Everyone does have the means." (italics mine) is a far cry from "that is less than ideal, and I was speaking only for my own community." (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	scarah2 2006-10-19 09:04 pm UTC (link)
	You are correct, please forgive the aggregious error of not qualifying the second sentence, when I had assumed it would flow from the previous one. Everyone here. (Reply to this)(Parent)

wrongly_amused
2006-10-20 01:53 am UTC (link)

That's good that you have close access to it, but unfortunately, your situation is not representative of the national whole. There are far too many places where decent access to places like Planned Parenthood and related projects are being shut down through loophole legislation or improper funding. That's without getting into the whole debacle with certain states passing laws allowing pharmacists and doctors to deny customers (usually women, of course) access to emergency contraception and its ilk. Or the poor standard of sexual education that exists in major areas of the U.S.

Having to reconsider the advantage of basic biological and psychological desires isn't a choice people should have to make. Is it fair to say somebody should consider carefully their financial position before planning a pregnancy? Sure. But declaring across the border that people in poverty should be stripped of basic human rights isn't.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -